David Carr: There’s No One That Wanted The Khalil Mack Trade To Happen

Derek Carr hasn’t said much about the Khalil Mack trade, but his brother, David, offered a few thoughts on Thursday.

“It’s a difficult thing, in particular for Derek because him and Khalil, they came in the same year and they’ve been really close,” David Carr said Thursday on 95.7 The Game’s Damon Bruce Show.

“They’re good friends, they talked a lot during the whole process, they talked a lot that day when it actually went down. I don’t think either one of them expected that to happen. It’s the unfortunate part of the business, for whatever reason, I don’t know if we’ll ever know the real reason why they didn’t make it happen… it’s a tough situation, I’m not going to lie, there’s no one that wanted this to happen.”

One of the interesting statements in there is the idea that we might not ever know the “real reason” the Raiders traded Mack. From the beginning, Jon Gruden and the team have made it about money, but the nonexistent relationship between Mack and Gruden undoubtedly played a significant role.

Carr also said no one wanted the trade to happen, but it’s hard to believe Gruden didn’t want it to happen. There had been whispers of a Mack trade going all the way back to the draft. General manager Reggie McKenzie, among others, may have been surprised it came down to a trade, but Gruden had been considering pressing the button for a while, I believe.

Making the move even more bizarre was the fact that the Rams were willing to give up two high picks for Mack with the understanding that they would probably be able to trade Mack next year and recoup their picks. In other words, the Rams understood Mack’s trade value wasn’t going to change between now and next year.

Did Gruden not understand that?

Surely he did, and that only adds more to the theory that Mack’s trade was personal for Gruden as much as anything else.

twitter: @raidersbeat


10 thoughts on “David Carr: There’s No One That Wanted The Khalil Mack Trade To Happen

  1. Mack’s value very much could have changed between now and next year if he got injured, so the risk for the Raiders is that they wouldn’t get the same picks – or for the Rams that they couldn’t recoup their picks. The risk for all parties (including Mack if he played before having a new contract) is the potential for injury.

    There are a few reasons they may not have pulled the trigger at the draft. They could have thought a deal could get done in the Von Miller range possibly structured in a team friendly way, or they didn’t expect him to hold out for regular season games without a contract – so a year under the current contract with the potential for a franchise tag or trade next offseason. The Raiders may also have felt the 2019 draft was stronger than 2018. The downside for this season is that we play without Mack, without any new draft picks, and without the ability to sign high quality free agents on short-term team friendly deals (see the Rams and Suh/Peters/Talib) with the money saved by not paying Mack since all of those FAs are already signed.

    1. Absolutely agree with this. Would have loved to keep mack, but I think we need more positions adressed then giving Mack long term deal.

  2. Being an iron *** doesn’t help and most of the time it bite’s you in the *** later, but still I will be a RAIDER FAN FOR EVER!!!

    1. I don’t get it I probably never will but in the end raider nation Carr needs to step up we will go as far as he takes us needs to quit playing scared

  3. I can say that maybe Mack holding out may have rub Gruden the wrong way. If he had showed up to camp it may have been a different story, that’s the biggest mystery we may never know

  4. Why are we comparing anyone’s style to the Rams? They are trying to buy a Superbowl on credit cards. The team as it is today will be totally different when it comes to to pay Goff and some other like Marcus Peters.

  5. The Raiders will regret this move for years to come. You could have given 3 first round picks for Mack and it would not have been enough. Mack was the best player on the Raiders, period, not Carr. I completely understand people talk about money, people say the Raiders did not win, but the games that were close, Mack closed out the game with an unreal play. This current Raiders roster is the oldest in the NFL and is not good. This team will be lucky to go 8-8. This looks more like a 6-10 or 5-11 team. Gruden gets what he wants, a top 10 first round pick, but it does not matter, that pick will struggle to live up to what Mack does on the football field.

  6. The “real reason” is value and salary. Mack may be better than Carr, but Mack just played one of the best games of his career and the Bears lost. He’s a game changer, but he’s not winning games on his own. If we’d given Mack the big contract first, I’d get it if we didn’t go wild with Carr. Those picks are going to be good picks. The Bears suck. I think Raiders got good value here.

  7. Carr needs to worry about improving his play rather than the moves the team made. If he wanted Mack there so bad he would’ve taken a more team friendly contract like Brady did to win and keep certain players. I’m getting tired of Carr’s comments and play. Only one good year and the MNF game reminded me of Mark Sanchez. Man up Carr and run for a first down and take shows down the field. I rather throw a pick trying to win than throwing away passes looking scared.

  8. My God, talk about beating a dead horse, don’t you have anything else you conjure up to write about. Face it Mack is gone and has already played his first game for the Bears, time to move on. Mack gave his all while in a Raider uniform and that will always be appreciated here, but he is gone now, move on……

Comments are closed.